From: Szabolcs Szakacsits <szaka@ntfs-3g.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: XFS vs Elevators (was Re: [PATCH RFC] nilfs2: continuous snapshotting file system)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:10:08 +0300 (MET DST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0808211447060.4532@dhcppc2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080821082532.GE5706@disturbed>
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 04:04:18PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >
> > One thing I just found out - my old *laptop* is 4-5x faster than the
> > 10krpm scsi disk behind an old cciss raid controller. I'm wondering
> > if the long delays in dispatch is caused by an interaction with CTQ
> > but I can't change it on the cciss raid controllers. Are you using
> > ctq/ncq on your machine?
It's a laptop and has NCQ. It makes no difference if NCQ is enabled or
disabled. The problem seems to be XFS only.
> > If so, can you reduce the depth to something less than 4 and see what
> > difference that makes?
>
> Just to point out - this is not a new problem - I can reproduce
> it on 2.6.24 as well as 2.6.26. Likewise, my laptop shows XFS
> being faster than ext3 on both 2.6.24 and 2.6.26. So the difference
> is something related to the disk subsystem on the server....
XFS definitely stalls somewhere: stats show virtually no CPU usage and no
time spent waiting for IO. No file system produces similar output.
procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu----
r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa
0 0 0 3146180 7848 600868 0 0 0 4128 790 549 0 2 98 0
0 0 0 3145200 7848 601524 0 0 0 2372 766 516 0 2 98 0
1 0 0 3144328 7848 602260 0 0 0 2924 792 542 1 2 98 0
0 1 0 3143824 7856 602664 0 0 0 4116 732 426 0 2 53 45
1 0 0 3143068 7856 603136 0 0 0 4676 756 534 0 3 95 1
0 0 0 3142652 7856 603540 0 0 0 6577 756 436 0 0 100 0
0 0 0 3141952 7856 604100 0 0 0 5840 764 498 1 3 96 0
0 0 0 3141424 7856 604544 0 0 0 4752 761 386 0 0 99 0
0 0 0 3140860 7856 604916 0 0 0 6477 785 495 0 1 98 0
0 0 0 3139980 7856 605468 0 0 0 2840 743 370 1 2 97 0
0 0 0 3138464 7856 606884 0 0 0 4902 795 421 0 4 96 0
0 0 0 3137636 7856 607696 0 0 0 4364 739 395 0 1 99 0
0 0 0 3136520 7856 608220 0 0 0 6160 774 566 0 2 97 0
Szaka
--
NTFS-3G: http://ntfs-3g.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-21 17:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-20 2:45 [PATCH RFC] nilfs2: continuous snapshotting file system Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-20 7:43 ` Andrew Morton
2008-08-20 8:22 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-08-20 18:47 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-20 16:13 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-20 21:25 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2008-08-20 21:39 ` Andrew Morton
2008-08-20 21:48 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2008-08-21 2:12 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 2:46 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2008-08-21 5:15 ` XFS vs Elevators (was Re: [PATCH RFC] nilfs2: continuous snapshotting file system) Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 6:00 ` gus3
2008-08-21 6:14 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 7:00 ` Nick Piggin
2008-08-21 8:53 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 9:33 ` Nick Piggin
2008-08-21 17:08 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-22 2:29 ` Nick Piggin
2008-08-25 1:59 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-25 4:32 ` Nick Piggin
2008-08-25 12:01 ` Jamie Lokier
2008-08-26 3:07 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-26 3:50 ` david
2008-08-27 1:20 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-27 21:54 ` david
2008-08-28 1:08 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 14:52 ` Chris Mason
2008-08-21 6:04 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 8:07 ` Aaron Carroll
2008-08-21 8:25 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 11:02 ` Martin Steigerwald
2008-08-21 15:00 ` Martin Steigerwald
2008-08-21 17:10 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits [this message]
2008-08-21 17:33 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2008-08-22 2:24 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-22 6:49 ` Martin Steigerwald
2008-08-22 12:44 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2008-08-23 12:52 ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2008-08-21 11:53 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-08-21 15:56 ` Dave Chinner
2008-08-21 12:51 ` [PATCH RFC] nilfs2: continuous snapshotting file system Chris Mason
2008-08-26 10:16 ` Jörn Engel
2008-08-26 16:54 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-27 18:13 ` Jörn Engel
2008-08-27 18:19 ` Jörn Engel
2008-08-29 6:29 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-29 8:40 ` Arnd Bergmann
2008-08-29 10:51 ` konishi.ryusuke
2008-08-29 11:04 ` Jörn Engel
2008-08-29 10:45 ` Jörn Engel
2008-08-29 16:37 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-29 19:16 ` Jörn Engel
2008-09-01 12:25 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2008-08-20 9:47 ` Andi Kleen
2008-08-21 4:57 ` Ryusuke Konishi
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-08-21 11:05 XFS vs Elevators (was Re: [PATCH RFC] nilfs2: continuous snapshotting file system) Martin Knoblauch
2008-08-21 15:59 ` Dave Chinner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.61.0808211447060.4532@dhcppc2 \
--to=szaka@ntfs-3g.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox